precision matrix
- North America > United States > Illinois (0.04)
- North America > United States > District of Columbia > Washington (0.04)
- North America > Canada > British Columbia > Metro Vancouver Regional District > Vancouver (0.04)
- North America > United States (1.00)
- South America > Chile > Santiago Metropolitan Region > Santiago Province > Santiago (0.04)
- Europe > Spain > Galicia > Madrid (0.04)
- Europe > France > Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur > Bouches-du-Rhône > Marseille (0.04)
- Research Report > New Finding (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (1.00)
- Health & Medicine (1.00)
- Government > Regional Government > North America Government > United States Government (1.00)
- Education (1.00)
- Information Technology (0.68)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- Asia > China > Guangdong Province > Shenzhen (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Belmont (0.04)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- Asia > China > Guangdong Province > Shenzhen (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Data Science (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Mathematical & Statistical Methods (0.67)
- Information Technology > Communications (0.67)
A Proofs of Linear Case Throughout the appendix, for ease of notation, we overload the definition of the function d
The proof of this lemma requires Lemma A.1, which characterizes the distribution of the residual By Pinsker's inequality, this implies d By Lemma A.1, we have E[ X ( null w w The proof is inspired by Theorem 11.2 in [20], with modifications to our setting. First, we construct a "ghost" dataset The most challenging aspect of the ReLU setting is that we do not have an expression for the TV suffered by the MLE, such as Lemma 4.2 in the linear case. The proof of this Lemma, as well as other Lemmas in this section, can be found in Appendix B.1. Using Lemma B.2 and Lemma B.3, we can form a uniform bound, such that all A straight forward combination of Lemma 4.3 and Lemma B.4 gives the following Theorem. Now we can apply Bernstein's inequality (Theorem 2.10 of [8]).
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Oxfordshire > Oxford (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago (0.05)
- North America > Canada > Quebec > Montreal (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Oxfordshire > Oxford (0.04)
- North America > United States (0.14)
- Europe > Switzerland > Basel-City > Basel (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia (0.04)
- Health & Medicine > Therapeutic Area > Oncology (0.46)
- Health & Medicine > Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology (0.46)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Biomedical Informatics > Translational Bioinformatics (0.82)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (0.68)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Mathematical & Statistical Methods (0.46)